Cannonball Run II

In the future when film scholars ponder whether Tony Danza was a better actor than say, an orangutan, they may come across "Cannonball Run II" and feel great delight. The reason being that "Cannonball Run II" features scenes in which they can compare and contrast the thespian skills of both Danza and orangutan. For my money the orangutan wins easily. Beyond the Danza versus orangutan intrigue the film may fail to generate much interest for them. While the large cast seems to be having a blast hamming it up on the open road, the end result is that this movie is pure road kill for viewers. I've been in car accidents that are more fun than this flick.

Once again Hal Needham brings together a half respectable cast like in the first Cannonball movie, but again forgot to bring a script. The mad-cap lunacy is still here, as are the cheap gags and stunts, but now it seems strange that all of this actually worked in the first movie, because it sure doesn't here. I found Burt and Dom laughing at their own jokes more than I did. It's no wonder Reynolds' career took a dive around this time if he was starring in films as dire as this.

The usual suspects are here while a few have (sensibly) dropped out of the race. Catherine Bach and Susan Anton are attractive enough, but don't quite cut it like Adrienne Barbeau and Co. did, and all they had to do was smile and flash their t**s once in a while. Richard Kiel is an unusual partner for Jackie Chan, but the little and large pairing works well. Chan also helped by bringing along his own stuntmen for the fight scenes, and it shows. Shirley MacLaine seems oddly at home with her trashy lines, while Telly Savalas fittingly over does things but is ultimately wasted in the movie, the same could be said for most of the cast. Frank Sinatra's inter-cut scenes are sickeningly shoddy and make the film appear as amateurish as it undeniably is.

If you did like the first Cannonball Run, (and there are a few!) you'll undoubtedly be disappointed with this outing, while those who didn't enjoy the first movie will no doubt detest the sequel.

I have seen all the comments that were posted for this movie and honestly, there's really nothing to complain about.I mean, come on! It's just one of them zany comedy in the 80s that featured an all-star studded cast (especially a younger Jackie Chan) racing cross country for 1 million dollars. I do agree that the acting was a bit bad for some folks out there, but this film still kept me watching to the very end. Some of the plot however was mostly pointless just to poke fun on humor, yet still entertaining to a certain degree. I watched CRII ever since I was 10 years old and it still remains to be a formidable force to collection since I now have it on DVD. I guess when it comes to 'dissing' this movie, it's because we eventually get older and that we downgrade things of the past. Movie making has evolved big time (with all the special effects and what not) and CRII was one of the great films to keep in the time capsule of 80s flicks. Every Hollywood movie remains special even how many would judge it. If it weren't for comedies like this, the comedy movies today wouldn't be as funnier as they are. And lastly, to the stars of the movies that have passed away through time, you all are appreciated and remembered...COMO CANNONBALL...FUERTE COMO CANNONBALL!

This film was good to watch and was still funny. Ok its not the best film in the world but i still found it funny and many still do. The chimp was cool and so were the rest of the cast. It was also a bonus to see Richard Kiel in the film (hes the big 7'2" tall man who pushed 4 men along the floor in the fight scene) Watch it everyone and just Relax. Overall I'd give it 7 out of 10

This movie is a perfect example of guilty pleasure. Sure, it is not well written (or is it?). It isn't well acted (or was it?). My point, this movie was a literal "winkathon". In other words, it was meant to be corny, goofy, silly, and down right fun to watch. That being said, go back and watch it again and you will see my point. Where did a (current) 4.X rating come from? All I can figure that is comes from votes from clueless suburbans, or maybe teens that don't realize how iconic this movie is, or how this movie was one of the last blasts of the drive-in culture of America. Sure, it's not Citizen Kane...but should merit an easy 6 on cast names alone.

That said, what really makes this movie great is the talent in it! It may be the best collection of screen legends and icon ever assembled. The point in time when this movie was made allowed this phenomenon to be possible. In 1984, most of these actors were slightly past their peak, but still in the acting game...so this may explain the ability to cast all of them (without a billion dollar budget). Try to replicate this today with an equivalent assortment of actors, and it would not be possible.

What makes this A-list super-fest even more golden is the fact that nearly every major player in this picture is now gone, or well up in years. Think of this movie as a video history of screen legends, or even a vague record of the car culture of the 70's and the phenomenon the actual Brock Yates cross country races were.

But if you are too young to know who these actors are, know nothing about the real Cannonball races, and don't appreciate drive-in type cinema/comedy, skip this one (rather than give it an unfair vote). Do that for me, and I won't give movies like Twilight or Lord of the Rings a 2.